Sunday, January 22, 2023


Note: In "Setting Matters Straight" posts I debunk online pronouncements that involve fundamentals which I first post on LinkedIn. The purpose is to induce practitioners to test their foundation knowledge against our debunking, where we explain what is correct and what is fallacious. For in-depth treatments check out the POSTS and our PAPERS, LINKS and BOOKS (or organize one of our on-site/online SEMINARS, which can be customized to specific needs). Questions and comments are welcome here and on LinkedIn.

What's right/wrong about this database picture?

“Other than constraints on cardinality, business rules are not generally represented on data models of either kind. Even in the case of business data models, the models are supposed to represent fundamental structures, while business rules represent variable constraints.”


Monday, January 2, 2023

 NEW "DATA MODELS" 5.2 (t&n)

Note: "Then & Now" (T&N) is a new version of what used to be the "Oldies but Goodies" (OBG) series. To demonstrate the superiority of a sound theoretical foundation relative to the industry's fad-driven "cookbook" practices, as well as the evolution/progress of RDM, I am re-visiting my 2000-06 debunkings, bringing them up to my with my knowledge and understanding of today. This will enable you to judge how well my arguments have held up and appreciate the increasing gap between scientific progress and the industry’s stagnation, if not outright regress.

This is a re-published series of several DBDebunk 2002 posts on Simon Wlliams' Lazy Software so-called "Associative Model of Data" (AMD), academic claims of its superiority over RDM ("The Associative Data Model Versus the Relational model") and predictions of the demise of the latter ("The decline and eventual demise of the Relational Model of Data").

  • Part 1 was an email exchange among myself (FP), Chris Date (CJD) and Lee Fesperman (LF) in reaction to Williams' claims that triggered the series.
  • Part 2 was my response to a reader's email questioning our dismissal of Williams's claims.
  • Part 3 was my email exchange with Williams where he provided his definition of a data model on which I conditioned any discussion with him and I debunked it.
  • Part 4 is my response to a reader's comments on my previous posts in the series.
  • Part 5.1 provided the background for my critique of Edward Hurley's report on Simon Williams's Lazy Software and his so-called "Associative Model of Data" (AMD).
View My Stats